Tribunal Orders Fresh Review by Assessing Officer for Long Term Capital Gain, Allowing New Evidence on Asset Ownership.

The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (A) and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, allowing the appellant to present additional evidence regarding the nature of the asset and ownership details. The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not admitting crucial evidence necessary for calculating Long Term Capital Gain, violating principles of natural justice. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, providing the appellant an opportunity to prove their case with proper evidence before the Assessing Officer.

---

---

Issues:
The issues involved in this case are related to the non-acceptance of additional evidences by the Ld. CIT (A), the violation of principles of natural justice, the refusal to admit crucial evidence for calculating Long Term Capital Gain, and the ex-parte assessment by the Assessing Officer due to non-compliance of statutory notices.

Non-Acceptance of Additional Evidences:
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT (A) for Assessment Year 2011-12, citing that additional evidences were not accepted by the Ld. CIT (A) on the grounds that they were not produced before the Assessing Officer. The appellant argued that statutory notices were not served upon them during the assessment proceedings, leading to an ex-parte assessment. The Ld. CIT (A) was criticized for not admitting crucial evidence necessary for the appeal, and it was contended that Rule 46A cannot override the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in dismissing certain grounds of appeal without verifying the services of statutory notices, thus violating the principle of natural justice.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT (A) did not admit additional evidence crucial for calculating Long Term Capital Gain, citing lack of support by an application under Rule 46A of the I.T Rules. It was held that the refusal to admit such evidence was a violation of the principle of natural justice. The appellant's written submission and essential material evidence were not considered by the Ld. CIT (A), impacting the assessment of tax liability on the sale of a residential house.

Ex-Parte Assessment and Restoration of Issue:
The Tribunal addressed the ex-parte assessment conducted by the Assessing Officer due to non-compliance with statutory notices. The Assessing Officer proceeded with the assessment based on available records, leading to the taxation of profit from the sale of property as short term capital gain. The Tribunal noted that the appellant, as one of the co-owners of the property, could not produce the purchase deed during the assessment, resulting in the short term capital gain assessment. The Tribunal set aside the Ld. CIT (A)'s order and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, allowing the appellant an opportunity to provide evidence regarding the nature of the asset and ownership details.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, with the Tribunal granting the appellant an opportunity to prove their case with proper evidence before the Assessing Officer. The decision aimed to uphold principles of natural justice and provide a fair chance for the appellant to present relevant evidence for the assessment of Long Term Capital Gain.

---